[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 112 (Wednesday, July 12, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H6897-H6898]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                  CHANGING THE STATUS QUO IN CONGRESS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Kingston] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, we have tried to revise the way we do 
business in Congress. Everybody is excited about getting out early 
tonight. We have done a lot of things to revise and change the status 
quo in Congress. And this freshman class and this new majority has 
really just rebuilt the way we do business.
  As Chairman of the Committee on Agriculture, Pat Roberts says, ``The 
status quo doesn't live in Washington, D.C. anymore.''
  One of the things we did early on is pass a balanced budget amendment 
in the House. Now, the United States' other body has not seen fit to 
pass the balanced budget amendment yet, but in the House of 
Representatives, we are living under the philosophy that we did pass 
the balanced budget.
  It is the intent of the American people to balance the budget and all 
of our appropriations bills are moving us in the direction of having a 
balanced budget by the year 2002. Now, a lot of people ask me why are 
you waiting seven years? And unfortunately it does appear that there 
are so many programs, it is so complicated when you are spending $1.4 
trillion, that you have to go about these things slowly.
  Part of the mechanism for balancing the budget is reducing spending, 
consolidating Government agencies, eliminating bureaucracies, 
eliminating duplications, getting some of the redtape off of small 
businesses and large businesses so that they can grow, expand in the 
economy, create more jobs, and bring in more tax revenues as a result 
of that.
  I see the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hoke] is here, the able-bodied 
chairman of the Theme Team, the most articulate Member of the floor. If 
the gentleman would like to add to this, I will yield to you.
  Mr. HOKE. I appreciate the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Kingston] 
yielding to me. There seems to be a great deal of commotion here in the 
House this evening. We failed in passing a rule and we almost devolved 
into the Committee of the Whole to deal with this Interior 
appropriations bill without a rule.

                              {time}  2115

  Can you tell me what is going on?
  Mr. KINGSTON. What has been going on is that the appropriations 
process, this $1.4 trillion that we spend each year of taxpayer's money 
and future taxpayers' money, because we deficit spend, as you know, it 
is broken down in 13 different bills. Each of those bills has a number 
of cuts; each of those bills has a number of eliminations of policies; 
each of those bills reduces the growth of spending. And because of 
that, the Interior bill is controversial, as any other of the 13 bills 
are, because Members feel very strongly about certain pet projects that 
are being cut and so forth or being reduced.
  So as has been the case here lately, now that we are getting into the 
appropriations cycle, there is a little more friction, often between 
parties but sometimes intraparty, among the House Members. So we are 
having to adjourn for the evening here.
  Mr. HOKE. We are certainly not going to adjourn. I hope we are going 
to continue to talk about it.
  Mr. KINGSTON. You and I are, but we are not going to have any more 
votes tonight until Members agree to the final print in the 
appropriations process.
  One of the things, as you know, that we do is when we reduce spending 
on a bill, we try to earmark the funds from one area to the other. So a 
lot of times a guy from one area of the country will try to cut 
spending from somebody else's area, because it is cheap. There is a 
political cost to him or her.
  Mr. HOKE. Are you suggesting that one person's, one Member's pork is 
another Member's laudable project of great American strength and 
importance?
  Mr. KINGSTON. The gentleman is a learned politician and that is true.
  I was not here, neither were you, when we had the infamous Lawrence 
Welk debates where the U.S. Congress was funding the Lawrence Welk 
Museum. I am not sure where he was from.
  Mr. HOKE. I can assure you it was not from my district.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Of the 435 House districts, all of them but one thought 
that that was pork. And, yet, we all have that problem.
  Mr. HOKE. Would the gentleman yield for a question?
  Mr. KINGSTON. Certainly.
  Mr. HOKE. To be a little bit more serious, it seems to me that there 
is a question about this particular bill and the rule and whether what 
we have seen here tonight is a reflection of a systemic problem in the 
House with respect to the appropriations process or if what we are 
dealing with is a problem with respect to this specific bill.

[[Page H 6898]]

  I have some strong feelings about that, that this in fact reflects a 
systemic problem in the whole appropriations process in the way that we 
spend money, the taxpayers' money. But maybe it is just about this 
bill. What are your thoughts?
  Mr. KINGSTON. I do not think the problem that we are having right now 
is directed toward the Interior appropriations bill. It has to do with 
money.

                          ____________________